Earnestly Contending For The Faith Which Was Once Delivered Unto The Saints

Earnestly Contending For The Faith Which Was Once Delivered Unto The Saints

The Ministry Of Reconciliation – Part 4

2 Corinthians 5:21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Let’s take a close look at this verse in the final part of our study on ‘the ministry of reconciliation.

2 Corinthians 5:21For He (the Father) hath made Him (Jesus) sin for us (not a sinner – but a sin sacrifice for believer’s), who knew no sin (Jesus never sinned – a perfect sacrifice); that we (Christians) might be made the righteousness of God (declared to be not guily of our sins; holy, just) in Him (in Christ).

God has a people. In the Bible they have many names:

“My people” (2 Chronicles 7:14)

“My sheep” (John 10:27)

“God’s elect” (Titus 1:1)

“My church” (Matthew 16:18)

God charged (imputed) their sins to Christ (our text): “Hath made him to be sin for us.”

Jesus was legally charged by the Father as the elect’s sin bearer. Jesus was only charged with His people’s sins legally – He never became a sinner Himself.

The Bible says of Christ, that he was : “Separate from sinners”, (Hebrews 7:26)

and that he…

“Offered himself without spot to God”. (Hebrews 9:14).

The Father charged – imputed His church’s sins to Christ. The doctrine of imputation is rarely taught today because we live in a day of great apostacy (departure) from the truth about Christ.

Christ’s perfect life and atoning death satisfied the justice of God on behalf of His people: concerning the church of God (not that building on the corner, but His people) it is said of Christ:

Acts 20:28…the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

In Christ’s perfect life, and in His atoning (sacrificial death), He secured, purchased, the salvation of His people!

When one is born again of the Spirit – they look to Christ alone for ALL of salvation.

As their sins have been charged (imputed) to Christ, Christ’s righteousness is charged (imputed) to them.

Christ’s righteousness is His perfect life and atoning death imputed/charged to the Christian.

God does not charge His people with their sins for they have been charged to Christ!

And Christ’s righteousness (perfect satisfaction to God’s law and justice) has been charged to them!

This is the great “transaction” described in our text – the wonderful doctrine of IMPUTATION!

If you find yourself beliving in Jesus Christ ALONE for ALL your salvation: it is because:

1) God chose you to salvation,

2) He sanctified you (set you apart for Himself) by the Holy Spirit,

3) and through the Holy Spirit caused you to believe on Christ by

4) calling you through the gospel – ‘the ministry of reconciliation’: These truths are declared wonderfully in God’s testimony.

2 Thessalonians 2:13But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

2 Thessalonians 2:14Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Our whole text (2 Corinthians 5:17-21) speaks of those who God has reconciled and called to serve as a representative for Christ with this gospel.

Does this include you?

Christ’s promise to His people:

Matthew 11:28Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, (convicted of your sins and desiring to look to Christ for ALL of salvation), and I (Jesus Christ) will give you rest.

One Comment on “The Ministry Of Reconciliation – Part 4”

Matthew 5:23–”If you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go First be reconciled to your brother.”

Some liberals have a difficult time reading this command correctly, They cannot think of themselves as needing any forgiveness, so they “interpret it” as saying “go to the person who has hurt you and make peace. (Michael Hardin, The Jesus Driven Life, p96)

We are not the ones who reconcile ourselves to God (by not being like Calvinists or other Christians we know). God is the one who reconciles. God is the subject of Reconciliation, But this does not mean that we need to become Socinians who deny that God is also the object of His own Reconciliation.

Romans 5:17 speaks of “receiving the reconciliation”. Why do we “receive the reconciliation”? Why not just say, we were reconciled? In other words, why not just get changed, so we are not at enmity? Why do we receive something?

If there is never legal enmity in God, then there is no wrath, and if not, there is no propitiation, and no need for it. But the problem is not only in our own hearts, at the altar. God has a problem with us, and only God can solve that problem.

Romans 5:17 does not mean overcoming your enmity in order to overcome your enmity! It means to passively receive by imputation what Christ did.

Matthew 5:24 (sermon on the mount) commands “leave your gift there before the altar and first be reconciled to your brother.” So, even though sinners are the objects of reconciliation, though sinners receive it, this reconciliation is not only the overcoming of the hostility of the elect, but what God has done in Christ to overcome God’s own judicial hostility to elect sinners.

John Murray: “In the Scripture the actual terms used with reference to the reconciliation wrought by Christ are to the effect that we are reconciled to God (Rom. 5:10) and that God reconciles us to Himself (II Cor. 5:18, 19; Eph. 2:16; Col. 1:2-22). Never is it expressly stated that God is reconciled to us.

It has often been stated, therefore, that the cross of Christ, insofar as it contemplated reconciliation, did not terminate upon God to the removal of His alienation from us but simply and solely upon us to the removal of our alienation from Him. In other words, it is not that which God has against us that is dealt with in the reconciliation but only our enmity against Him. It is strange that this contention should be so persistent, that scholars should be content with what is, to say the least, so superficial an interpretation of the usage of Scripture in reference to the term in question.

It is not to be denied that the reconciliation is concerned with our enmity against God. Reconciliation, like all the other categories deals with sin and the liability proceeding from it. And sin is enmity against God. But, when the teaching of Scripture is properly analyzed, it will be seen that reconciliation involves much more than that which might appear at first sight to be the case.

When in Matthew 5:24 we read, “Be reconciled to thy brother,” we have an example of the use of the word “reconcile” that should caution us against a common inference. In this instance the person bringing his gift to the altar is reminded that his brother has something against him. It is this grievance on the part of the other that is the reason for interrupting his act of worship. It is the grievance of the other that the worshiper must take into account, and it is the removal of that grievance, of that alienation that the reconciliation which he is required to effect contemplates.

He is to do all that is necessary to remove the alienation in the mind and attitude of the other. It is plain, therefore, that the situation requiring reconciliation is the frame of mind or the attitude of the other and what the reconciliation must effect is the change of mind on the part of the other, namely, the person called the brother. Thus we are pointed in a very different direction from that which we might have expected from the mere formula “be reconciled.”

And although it is the “against” of the brother that is in view as requiring a change, the exhortation is in terms of “be reconciled to thy brother” and not at all “Let thy brother be reconciled to thee.” By this analysis it can easily be seen that the formula “reconciled to God” can well mean that what the reconciliation has in view is God’s alienation from us and the removal of that alienation. Matthew 5:23, 24 shows how indefensible is an interpretation that rests its case upon what, at best, is mere appearance.